InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 19
Posts 2983
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/25/2020

Re: Wise Man post# 765134

Saturday, 08/26/2023 2:18:33 AM

Saturday, August 26, 2023 2:18:33 AM

Post# of 795767
Clarification: 0.5% was the spread over Treasuries (Remember that for the FHLBs, it was 0.299% in 1989 -GAO report-) to calculate the ultimate dividend rate on SPS, once the Separate Account plan comes to an end with the "Rehabilitation of FnF" (prerequisite from Justice Alito and judge Willett, known as "The synchronized"). This spread is the UST's Net Interest Yield that takes into consideration its cost of funding. The Net Interest Income earned by UST in the cheap bailout of FnF and in exchange for their risky Public Mission.
The amount that is netted out with the interests that UST owes to FnF on the $152.3B due, is the whole cumulative dividend assessed at a weighted-average 1.8% dividend rate on the UST's quarterly investments in SPS, "taking into consideration the Treasury yields at the time" (which means that it's applied a spread over Treasuries, as per the Charter Act dynamics) and partial repayments (as per the exception to the FHEFSSA's Restriction on Capital Distributions), until the SPS were fully repaid, estimated in late 2013 and late 2014, in FMCC and FNMA, respectively.
Until the Charter Act is revoked, it's legally binding in its entirety, not just the amendments inserted by HERA. The same occurs with the FHEFSSA.
FnF are not ordinary businesses.
The conservator's Incidental Power "take any action authorized by this section", wraps it all up.
The infinite rate on SPS inserted by HERA in the Charter Act, the grounds for the SPSPA, wasn't included as exception into this other provision entitled "Fee Limitation of United States". Pelosi/Calabria's HERA didn't dare to amend it with "PROHIBITION, except an infinite rate". Huh? A telltale sign that the infinite rate inserted by HERA was meant for a Separate Account plan (with the 1989 FHLBs' bailout by Congress entitled: "Separate Account for the repayment of the RefCORP obligation with the taxpayers", in the rear mirror) and was never meant to be the ultimate rate. They thought they can get away with it with judicial maneuvers.